I know we shouldn’t talk R1 in this thread, but imho attacking either NOR or UKR in R1 is very very risky and pretty much messes up the russian army, leaving it wide open to every G1 counterattack imagined. In most cases G1 will be able to reclaim WR, NOR and URK (and even KAR) and destroy the bulke of the Red army armor while they are at it.
Nonetheless, if one desides to do so, imho it pays better off to attack NOR than UKR, because the destruction of the NOR fgt assures that the SZ2 BB survives G1 which I believe is absolutely paramount for the Allies, either playing a US Atlantic or Pacific strat (especially the latter).
As for G1, imho must be (given R1 took WR and UKR)
- capture KAR, UKR with minimum forces required
- SS+bmb+fgt SZ2,
- BB SZ15
- 2 inf 2 arm 1 fgt AES,
- 3 fgt SZ13
- fortify WE + NOR with 3 inf, fgt each
8 ) 2 SS SZ7
…… and place:
- AC (+land 1 or 2 ftr on it, depending on SZ13 battle), TT in SZ5
- CC, TT SZ14 (and move to SE 2 arm ->WE and 2 inf ->G)
“AC Graff Zeppeling reporting for duty”. :-P
I know it leaves Europe empty, but imho it messes up UK1 for good, because i) out of nowhere UK must consider a G2 “Sea Lion” (2 inf, 2 arm, 4 ftr, 1 bmb), ii) it assures the german flow to Africa no matter what happens to SZ14 CC or the SZ15 BB.
And G can afford an empty Europe so early in the game, with the US far away, the UK in trouble and the red army still underequipped.
What do you think?